1. The teacher educator as learner Questioning our beliefs Jo-Ann Delaney + Madeleine du Vivier

2. Product v process

3. Context 2 teacher educators working at two different universities. (Canterbury Christ University, University College London) A general interest in language and language learning. An interest is reflection and in particular contesting “givens”.

4. Rationale  Teacher educators are viewed as “experts”, trainee teachers as “imposters” (Brookfield 2012).  Overwhelming focus on the beliefs of new teachers (Lortie 2002) and the use of the BALLI (Mattheoudakis 2006, Peacock 2001) for language teachers.  In most teacher education settings, teacher educators make judgements on the effectiveness of teaching.

5. Unquestioned beliefs Researchers who make disparaging remarks about how beginning teachers accept and adopt very traditional views of what it means to teach are often unaware that they themselves tend to accept, uncritically, traditional views regarding the learning-to-teach process. Wideen et al1998:166 Question your most deeply held assumptions about teaching and learning, expose them to the fiery eye of reason and see if they can still walk in the straight line after the experience. Didau 2015:5 There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so. Hamlet: Act 2, Scene 2

6. Our study Attended an evening Spanish class at elementary level. Made notes during and after lessons. Weekly discussions on Skype about findings. Reviewed key changes in our beliefs and assumptions.

7. Our approach – grounded theory Allows for theoretical perspectives to emerge from data rather than starting research with an orientating conceptual framework. “simultaneous data collection and analysis” (Holstein & Gubrium 2008:676). “An amorphous collection of practical principles [can] be said to constitute a grounded theory of practice”. Eraut 1994:65

8. Examine own beliefs Emerging areas from lesson Notes Contested discussion on Skype Reflection Confirm Contest Write

9. Some conclusions about language pedagogy

10. Group work Collaborative learning / peer teaching / group work

11. Didau says……. We’ve all encountered pupils who struggle to answer questions and come up with ideas.... We know that simply getting them to discuss some possibilities with the student sitting next to them can be sufficient to jolly them along. Maybe they haven’t become more creative, and maybe this jut gives them less of an excuse for doing nothing. Who cares: it gets them working. … The point of collaboration is that it opens us up to the ideas of others. But so does reading books. Feel free to have your students work in groups if you must, but don’t pretend there is sufficient evidence out there to support your preferences being foisted on others. Didau 2015:224

12. Authenticity

13. The minutia of classroom management

14. The language of praise

15. Changes to my practice as a teacher and teacher educator (product) Brief, purposeful, selective and reasoned use of group work and collaborative learning opportunities. Encourage FS English teachers to do poetry! Explicitly teach classroom management at every stage. Populate my feedback with excellent fantastic outstanding awesome

16. Further actions (process) Exploit opportunities to change roles (learner, observee). Find a role “buddy” to contest emerging findings.

17. References  Brookfield, S.D (2012) Teaching for Critical Thinking San Francisco: Jossey-Bass  Eraut, M (1994) Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence. London: The Falmer Press  Holstein, J & Gubrium, J (2008) “Interpretive Practice and Social Action” in Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry (pages 173-202) Thousand Oaks: Sage  Mattheoudakis, M (2006) “Tracking changes in pre-service EFL teacher beliefs in Greece: A longitudinal study.” Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (1272-1288)  Peacock, M (2001) “Pre-service ESL teachers’ beliefs about second language learning: a longitudinal study.” System 29 (117-195)  Wideen et al (1998) “A Critical Analysis of the Research on Learning to Teach: Making the Case for an Ecological Perspective on Inquiry” Review of Educational Research 68:2 (130-178)